Based on the following arguments, some people insist that the U.S. government should impose tariffs of 25% on the imported steel.

During the past year, America lost more than 1.1 million manufacturing jobs . . . because domestic factories have shifted their operations to low-wage countries. Manufacturing assures our national defense, our global leadership, and the living standards of more than 17 million workers.

(Other nations subsidize their domestic steel industries). Longer-term, subsidized imports will destroy a vital American industry and U.S. jobs.

In an uncertain and dangerous world, does America really want to become dependent on Russia, Japan, China, Brazil and developing countries for something so basic as steel?

Think about effects of the trade barriers on the following people and companies.

• Effects of the barriers
• On U.S. workers

• On U.S. steel producers

• On firms that use large amounts of steel in the manufacture of finished products (for example: GM)

• On consumers of products that are made with U.S. steel (for example: people who buy GM automobiles)

1. Considering these consequences, what is your opinion on the trade barrier? Should the U.S. government impose trade barriers on the import of steel from abroad? Please justify your answer.

1. If the barrier is imposed, what should U.S. steel producers do to make this barrier beneficial to more people?

1. If the barrier is not imposed, what should the U.S government do to reduce the negative impacts of free trade?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Effects of Trade Barriers on Steel Industry Arguments for Trade Barriers Protecting Jobs The argument claims that cheap imports are causing job losses in the steel industry impacting millions of worke... View the full answer